BBC biased in favour of England at World Cup ....

quarky

ewal said:

Let's say Scotland had qualified and England hadn't like in 1978 (don't laugh!!). Would you expect the tournament to be covered by BBC Scotland or BBC UK? Put another way, would you be happy if the whole of the UK was served just by BBC Scotland?

I would expect BBC UK to show it. |I would be pretty disappointed if that wasn't the case to be honest.

If yes, would you have any problem if commentators and analysts referred to the Scotland team using pronouns like 'we' and 'us'? If you could accept this, on the basis that everyone in the UK would likely be supporting Scotland as the only UK team in the competition, would you concede that some England supporters might find it irritating?

I would be completely fine with it. I would prefer it, rather than having "neutral" commentators. Yep I agree that some others might find it annoying, but I would tell them to get over it. I know that does sound dismissive, but I genuinely think that BBC, being British, should be supporting all British teams.

Back in '98 I'm pretty sure that Scotland's games had a BBC Scotland/ STV commentary team  which broadcast in Scotland, and a BBC/ ITV commentary team broadcasting in the rest of the UK. That way the commentators could be as biased or unbiased as required - much as what happens for games between the home nations.

Regarding your last paragraph, not sure I'm understanding your point, are you saying that in your opinion minority broadcasters like BBC Scotland, BBC Wales, etc, should not be funded by the TV licence fee?

Nope, perfectly fine with those, but I would draw the line at separate costs for transmitting sporting events, just because someone wants their own specific commentary. Perhaps the easiest/cheapest solution is to use the Red Button to be able to swap commantary. Again though, I wouldn't want that cost to be carried by the tax-payer.

ewal

Our unique situation where UK broadcasters have to cater to the tastes of supporters of four national football teams forever throws this debate up.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2007/jan/25/sport.comment1

quarky

ewal said:

Our unique situation where UK broadcasters have to cater to the tastes of supporters of four national football teams forever throws this debate up.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2007/jan/25/sport.comment1

It isn't unique. NZ has multiple national teams too (mainly rugby though, not football). South Africa looked at doin the same (not sure if they have). I am sure there are others. The division isn't an internal grographical boudary, but it is still there.

Fretwired

ewal said:

Our unique situation where UK broadcasters have to cater to the tastes of supporters of four national football teams forever throws this debate up.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2007/jan/25/sport.comment1

Most of that article is irrelevant. For a start the Six Nations sees England, Scotland and Wales play each other. You obviously need impartiality in that tournament.

Back in 1978 one of the the reasons most England supporters were happy to support Scotland at the World Cup was the unique make-up of our football league. In the era before foreign imports a German football team was full of Germans, a top Italian team was full of Italians etc. The typical English division one team would have players pulled from England, Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland and Ireland. I think Liverpool once fielded a team with only one Englishman who was Emlyn Hughes. One of the most successful Liverpool teams that won the European Cup had players from all over the British Isles.

As a consequence fans were loyal to the players in their team and would happily support them in a Scottish jersey or Irish jersey etc. I remember watching Scotland play on a TV set in my local pub. Everyone was cheering for Scotland. If you listen to the commentary in the clip I posted above the voice maybe English, Coleman, but he's hardly neutral. He screams down the mic when Gemmell scores. I really don't see a problem with something like football when a home nation is playing .. was the ITV commentator during Wales recent failed campaign to qualify impartial? No he wasn't.

ewal

quarky said:

ewal said:

Let's say Scotland had qualified and England hadn't like in 1978 (don't laugh!!). Would you expect the tournament to be covered by BBC Scotland or BBC UK? Put another way, would you be happy if the whole of the UK was served just by BBC Scotland?

I would expect BBC UK to show it. |I would be pretty disappointed if that wasn't the case to be honest.

So the pundits and anchor would be the ones that we all associate with the game in England - Lineker, Murphy, Wright, Keown, , Shearer, etc, and the commentators would be the ones with experience of commentating on English domestic football and the England team. I think that would be strange. Why not just use the production team with the most experience and knowledge of Scottish football - BBC Scotland?

"Perhaps the easiest/cheapest solution is to use the Red Button to be able to swap commantary. Again though, I wouldn't want that cost to be carried by the tax-payer."

Good solution - there have been games in the past where you could use the Red Button to switch to the Radio Scotland commentary. And obviously it is currently used when BBC Alba is covering domestic rugby to give viewers the choice of a Gaelic or English commentary.

quarky

ewal said:

quarky said:

ewal said:

Let's say Scotland had qualified and England hadn't like in 1978 (don't laugh!!). Would you expect the tournament to be covered by BBC Scotland or BBC UK? Put another way, would you be happy if the whole of the UK was served just by BBC Scotland?

I would expect BBC UK to show it. |I would be pretty disappointed if that wasn't the case to be honest. 

So the pundits and anchor would be the ones that we all associate with the game in England - Lineker, Murphy, Wright, Keown, , Shearer, etc, and the commentators would be the ones with experience of commentating on English domestic football and the England team. I think that would be strange. Why not just use the production team with the most experience and knowledge of Scottish football - BBC Scotland?

I would expect Scottish commentators/pundits, etc., but use those commenters under the BBC umbrella. Or BBC Scotland does it, but it is broadcast by BBC (like Doctor Who and BBC Wales ) As long as it isn't one product for Scotland, one for England, one for Wales, etc, etc. That would just be pointless IMO.

Fretwired

quarky said:

ewal said:

quarky said:

ewal said:

Let's say Scotland had qualified and England hadn't like in 1978 (don't laugh!!). Would you expect the tournament to be covered by BBC Scotland or BBC UK? Put another way, would you be happy if the whole of the UK was served just by BBC Scotland?

I would expect BBC UK to show it. |I would be pretty disappointed if that wasn't the case to be honest. 

So the pundits and anchor would be the ones that we all associate with the game in England - Lineker, Murphy, Wright, Keown, , Shearer, etc, and the commentators would be the ones with experience of commentating on English domestic football and the England team. I think that would be strange. Why not just use the production team with the most experience and knowledge of Scottish football - BBC Scotland?

I would expect Scottish commentators/pundits, etc., but use those commenters under the BBC umbrella. Or BBC Scotland does it, but it is broadcast by BBC (like Doctor Who and BBC Wales ) As long as it isn't one product for Scotland, one for England, one for Wales, etc, etc. That would just be pointless IMO.

BBC Scotland presents Sports Scene which has Scottish commentators and pundits covering the SPL etc.

Phil_aka_Pip

The BBC pro-remainer bias bothers me more. And the fact that they keep giving St Tony of Bliar the "oxygen of publicity".

ewal

Fair do's. It's never gonna happen anyway

57Deluxe

they all seem genuinely upset about Germany going home as if whoever now wins won't win on any merit...